” The age of 3-D printing in carbon fiber has hardly arrived. But the controversy over 3-D printing carbon fiber guns is well under way.

Starting in the second half of last year, 3-D printing startup MarkForged has been shipping the Mark One, a device it advertises as the world’s first 3-D printer that prints carbon fiber; The Mark One digitally fabricate objects in a material as light as plastic and as strong by some measures as aluminum. But one group isn’t about to receive its Mark One order: Defense Distributed, the non-profit political group that invented the first fully 3-D printed gun nearly two years ago.1″

As loathe as we are to provide these anti-liberty people with any publicity , we thought that our readers deserved to meet the staff of this anti-free trade business . The below video introduces you to the company founder Greg Mark and the rest of his staff . It should come as no surprise that the company is based in the “People’s Republic” of Massachusetts .

” Defense Distributed founder Cody Wilson says he pre-ordered the Mark One about a year ago for $8,000, but was told last Friday in a phone call with a MarkForged salesman that the company refuses to sell him one, citing terms of service that disallow private citizens from using the machine to make firearms. So instead, Wilson is offering what he describes as a “bounty” to anyone who can get him MarkForged’s new carbon fiber printer.

“ Anyone who’s got access to one, any reseller, any individual or business or entity that can deliver it to me, I will give them fifteen grand,” says Wilson, who has also released a YouTube video advertising his offer. “I’m going to get this printer. I’m going to make a gun with it. And I’m going to make sure everyone knows it was made with a MarkForged printer.” “

” Eighteen months after demonstrating that he could make a 3D-printed gun, Cody Wilson announced Wednesday that his nonprofit group, Defense Distributed, has now moved on to simplifying the process of manufacturing traditional metal guns.

Defense Distributed is now selling a $1,200 computer-numerically-controlled (CNC) mill—dubbed the “Ghost Gunner“—that can complete an unfinished lower receiver for an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle as part of a limited pre-order. While designed to mill an AR-15 lower, the CNC could theoretically mill anything of a similar size.

Wilson’s new Ghost Gunner makes home gunsmithing faster, cheaper, and more portable than ever before.”

” Now, the total cost of semi-finished lower, a parts kit, an upper, a magazine, and the Ghost Gunner costs around $2,000—not a significant savings over buying the whole thing lock, stock, and barrel—but many hobbyists are excited at the opportunity. The price is expected to rise to at least $1,500 in 2015. As of this writing, Wilson had already sold 38 as part of that $1,200 pre-order.

The Ghost Gunner name is a jab at California State Senator Kevin De León, who introduced a bill that would have banned the sale, manufacture, purchase, and trafficking of untraceable “ghost guns” unless they were pre-registered with the Department of Justice through a serial number and gun owner background check. However, Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed the bill on Tuesday. (De León’s office did not immediately respond to Ars’ request for comment.)

Ars Technica has more on Cody Wilson’s latest contribution to personal liberty . Mr Wilson and Defense Distributed have done more for liberty and personal rights in a year than all the “republican/conservative” members of Congress have in their entire careers .

” You may have noticed my complete lack of posting about Cody Wilson and his printed gun technology. The reason for that is simple: it’s a gimmick. Sure, printed guns can work, but the question is inevitably “how long?” When it comes to the catastrophic failure of the thermoplastics used in the construction of the barrels and firing chambers, it isn’t a matter of “if,” but “when.”

As a practical matter, with current and near-term technologies, plastic guns are a loser.

That said, some of the emerging technologies that make plastic guns feasible are viable for metalwork as well, and machines like the crowd-funded Othermill means that CNC metalworking machines will soon be in the hands of people for a fraction of the cost of the plastic printing machines.”

The other day we posted an article on how the advent of 3D printing was striking fear in heart of the State , and possible ways that they might attempt to regain control . One of the ways was through the control of the specialized materials required to make use of the “additive manufacturing” technology .

Today we happened upon an article by Bob Owens that makes it even less likely that the government can control the home manufacture of firearms and thus maintain some semblance of “gun control”. Welcome to the world of home CNC machining .No need of hard to get or potentially” regulated” additives with CNC . Commonly available raw metals will do the trick .

” If you still think gun control isn’t a problem, it’s about to get a whole lot worse. As 3D-printed gun blueprints continue to circulate, they will cause more harm than good.

Back in 2012, a Texan student, Cody Wilson, developed a gun designed to be built with a 3D printer. The full story can be viewed over at the Sydney Morning Herald. In order to conform with US firearm laws, an inch large chunk of steal was inserted to make it detectable for meta detectors.

It took 16 parts and 27 hours for the NSW police to make a gun. While the gun did fire and generated an enormous stopping power for what it’s worth, there are drawbacks which Homeland Security and various regional police units are emphasizing.

Seen through a demonstration video by released by the NSW police, the 3D printed gun blew up after a shot, which can cause bodily harm to both the victim as well as the shooter. Scraps of plastic flew everywhere as the gun was fired, and it can be views from the attached video.”

We think there are some problems with this video , or rather the events that it depicts . It is certainly very easy for the authorities to produce these kinds of videos showing the inherent “dangers” of making your own firearm by using plastics that are known to be unable to withstand the pressures involved in detonating a center-fire pistol cartridge .

There are different grades of plastic available for all types of manufacturing today and that goes for 3D printing as well as any other. Having experience as professional fireworks technicians we can say that there are plastics that are safe to use as launch tubes and there are others that are not . That goes for metals as well as plastics .

While we’ve no doubt of the veracity of the video and the New South Wales experiment in 3D gun construction , the fact is that Mr Wilson has created one that does fire safely.

There can be no doubt either , that the whole concept of 3D printing and the loss of control that it represents to the State has the authorities quaking in their boots , as well it should . However , the fact remains that the “Additive Manufacturing”horse has fled the barn never to be re-stalled .

Furthermore , the emphasis placed on the choice of plastic as a construction medium is of minimal importance to the whole “make it yourself” issue . Very few people have a desire for an undetectable firearm , especially when the authorities are certainly capable of detecting the cartridges and projectiles , without which the “plastic” gun is useless

What the State should truly fear from 3D printing is the fact that it works with metals as well . That means that with the proper printer , freely available CAD drawings and materials anyone will very soon be able to print up their very own , un-numbered , untraceable , fully functional 1911 or AR-15 … Chew on that …

There-in lies the rub . What mode of Statist intervention are they going to try in a ham-fisted attempt at stuffing the 3D genie back in the bottle ? They’ll never be able to stop the flow of digital file sharing … the drawings , CAD files and how-to information freely available via the internet , that much is a certainty . Of course that doesn’t mean the idiots won’t try , but that effort is doomed to failure .

No , the only real hope they have of smothering this technology in it’s cradle is through the control of either the printers themselves , or the materials using in the layering process itself . But again , the task that the State faces even attempting to tackle the issue from the supply side is daunting . You have doubts , you say ?The State will be able to control the sale of printers and additives you say ?

If you believe that allow us to put this in a different perspective … just think of the printers as guns and the additives as drugs . Need we say more ? We don’t know about where you live , but in most parts of the country it would take all of an hour on the street to be able to come up with just about anything in the gun/drug department anyone could desire .

We have been following Mr Wilson and this emerging technology for some time now and have posted many items on this fascinating topic . In fact we feel that the combination of the internet and the coming 3D home manufacturing revolution sound the death-knell for the State as we know it … One can hope anyway . To that end we offer a collection of links from past articles that we have posted on the future as seen in 3D …

” The battle for control of dangerous digital shapes may have just begun.

On Thursday, Defense Distributed founder Cody Wilson received a letter from the State Department Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance demanding that he take down the online blueprints for the 3D-printable “Liberator” handgun that his group released Monday, along with nine other 3D-printable firearms components hosted on the group’s website Defcad.org. The government says it wants to review the files for compliance with arms export control laws known as the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, or ITAR. By uploading the weapons files to the Internet and allowing them to be downloaded abroad, the letter implies Wilson’s high-tech gun group may have violated those export controls

Despite taking down his files, Wilson doesn’t see the government’s attempts to censor the Liberator’s blueprints as a defeat. On the contrary, Defense Distributed’s radical libertarian and anarchist founder says he’s been seeking to highlight exactly this issue, that a 3D-printable gun can’t be stopped from spreading around the global Internet no matter what legal measures governments take. “This is the conversation I want,” Wilson says. “Is this a workable regulatory regime? Can there be defense trade control in the era of the Internet and 3D printing?”

Wilson compares his new legal troubles to the widely-followed case in the mid-1990s of Philip Zimmermann, the inventor of the cryptographic software PGP, who was threatened with indictment under ITAR for putting his military-grade encryption software online. “It’s PGP all over again,” says Wilson.

Here is the letter Mr Wilson received from the State department ;

” In reply letter to DTCC Case: 13-0001444

[Cody Wilson’s address redacted]

Dear Mr. Wilson,

The Department of State, Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance, Enforcement Division (DTCC/END) is responsible for compliance with and civil enforcement of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778) (AECA) and the AECA’s implementing regulations, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (22 C.F.R. Parts 120-130) (ITAR). The AECA and the ITAR impose certain requirements and restrictions on the transfer of, and access to, controlled defense articles and related technical data designated by the United States Munitions List (USML) (22 C.F.R. Part 121).

The DTCC/END is conducting a review of technical data made publicly available by Defense Distributed through its 3D printing website, DEFCAD.org, the majority of which appear to be related to items in Category I of the USML. Defense Distributed may have released ITAR-controlled technical data without the required prior authorization from the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), a violation of the ITAR.

Technical data regulated under the ITAR refers to information required for the design, development, production, manufacture, assembly, operation, repair, testing, maintenance or modification of defense articles, including information in the form of blueprints, drawings, photographs, plans, instructions or documentation. For a complete definition of technical data, see 120.10 of the ITAR. Pursuant to 127.1 of the ITAR, it is unlawful to export any defense article or technical data for which a license or written approval is required without first obtaining the required authorization from the DDTC. Please note that disclosing (including oral or visual disclosure) or tranferring technical data to a foreign person, whether in the United States or abroad, is considered an export under 120.17 of the ITAR.

The Department believes Defense Distributed may not have established the proper jurisdiction of the subject technical data. To resolve this matter officially, we request that Defense Distributed submit Commodity Jurisdiction (CJ) determination requests for the following selection of data files available on DEFCAD.org, and any other technical data for which Defense Distributed is unable to determine proper jurisdiction:

DTCC/END requests that Defense Distributed submits its CJ requests within three weeks of the receipt of this letter and notify this office of the final CJ determinations. All CJ requests must be submitted electronically through an online application using the DS-4076 Commodity Jurisdiction Request Form. The form, guidance for submitting CJ requests, and other relevant information such as a copy of the ITAR can be found on DDTC’s website at http://www.pmddtc.state.gov.

Until the Department provides Defense Distributed with the final CJ determinations, Defense Distributed should treat the above technical data as ITAR-controlled. This means that all such data should be removed from public access immediately. Defense Distributed should also review the remainder of the data made public on its website to determine whether any additional data may be similarly controlled and proceed according to ITAR requirements.

Additionally, DTCC/END requests information about the procedures Defense Distributed follows to determine the classification of its technical data, to include aforementioned technical data files. We ask that you provide your procedures for determining proper jurisdiction of technical data within 30 days of the date of this letter to Ms. Bridget Van Buren, Compliance Specialist, Enforcement Division, at the address below.Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance

PM/DTCC, SA-1, Room L132

2401 E Street, NW

Washington, DC 20522

Phone 202-663-3323

We appreciate your full cooperation in this matter. Please note our reference number in any future correspondence.

” Blueprints for the first-ever plastic gun produced on a 3-D printer, that can pass through metal detectors, have been downloaded over 100,000 times since it was posted to the web on Monday.

Designs for the ‘Liberator’ pistol were posted online by Defense Distributed but on Thursday the U.S. State Department ordered the website to take down the blueprints, on the basis that the plans could violate export regulations. “

” The blueprints, that could be produced on 3-D printers costing as little as $1,000, were seen as a breakthrough because no one has previously designed such a weapon that could withstand the pressure of firing modern ammunition.

Surprisingly, most downloads of the plans did not come from inside the U.S. but from Spain.

The U.S. is second, ahead of Brazil, Germany, and the U.K., according to Haroon Khalid, a developer working with Defense Distributed, who reported the statistics to Forbes.”

” It’s an oppressive spring afternoon in Austin, Texas. Low clouds threaten to unleash a gullywasher. After a couple of emails and phone calls I’m at an apartment complex off to the west of the University of Texas campus. A pair of young men pull up and pop the lid on the trunk of their car. One pulls a flat metal case from the trunk and I jokingly ask, “Is that a gun or a guitar?”

The lead man could blend in with the musicians and hipsters all over Austin who recently dominated the city during SXSW, but he isn’t one and what he has in the case is an instrument, but it’s not musical.

The man with the strange rifle is Cody Wilson, 25, the co-director of Defense Distributed. That’s the group that in the past year has gone from not even existing to being on the verge of changing everything.

Or nothing. The fact is, neither Wilson nor anyone else knows what effect realizing his idea will have. But we’re very close to finding out.

Defense Distributed is about to create the world’s first fully functional, fully printed gun. The wikiweapon will be real.

We go into his apartment and he shows me around. It’s a typical male college student’s place — he’s a law student at UT — a bit messy and unkempt. Up in his bedroom he has a huge American flag on one wall and the famous “Come and Take It” flag opposite. It’s a replica of the flag that flew at Gonzales, Texas, on October 2, 1835 when Texians dared the Mexican army to retrieve a cannon.”

” A New York Democrat wants to revise gun laws to encompass a downloadable plastic gun produced on a 3-D printer.

On Friday, Defense Distributed premiered its plastic firearm with only one small necessary metal part: the firing pin.

Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) wants to pour water on this invention with his Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act, which extends a 1988 ban on plastic guns that expires this year and extends it to include homemade, plastic high-capacity magazines and receivers. The piece of metal in the downloadable gun, which allows it to be spotted by metal detectors, keeps it within current law.

“Security checkpoints, background checks, and gun regulations will do little good if criminals can print plastic firearms at home and bring those firearms through metal detectors with no one the wiser. When I started talking about the issue of plastic firearms months ago, I was told the idea of a plastic gun is science-fiction. Now that this technology appears to be upon us, we need to act now to extend the ban on plastic firearms,” Israel said.”

Not to be upstaged , fellow Statist NYSenator, Chuck “Am I On” Schumer , puts in his two cents.

” On CNBC today, Schumer “at the very least” Congress needs to make it “a crime to have such a gun.”

“If the police see you carrying one on the street, they’ll know it’s a crime. If anybody sees you doing it, they’ll know it’s a crime,” he said. “What we should do beyond that, I don’t know. I mean, obviously there are First Amendment issues. We’ve had this issue about bombs being put on the Internet in the past. And obviously someone could go overseas and put something on the Internet where our laws don’t govern.” “

” As he pulls the firearm from the case to show it to me, a woman walks by with her dog. I hope that we’re not alarming her. She didn’t seem to be surprised in the least. This is Texas, and guns are everywhere from the local Walmart to the state capitol building, every day.

The man with the strange rifle is Cody Wilson, 25, the co-director of Defense Distributed. That’s the group that in the past year has gone from not even existing to being on the verge of changing everything.

Or nothing. The fact is, neither Wilson nor anyone else knows what effect realizing his idea will have. But we’re very close to finding out.

Defense Distributed is about to create the world’s first fully functional, fully printed gun. The wikiweapon will be real.”

Cody Wilson On The Angel Clark Show Talking 3-D Printable Guns

” Cody R. Wilson is a student at the University of Texas School of Law. He is the crypto-anarchist founder and director of Defense Distributed and DEFCAD, non-profit organizations that develop and publish open source gun designs suitable for 3D printing. Wilson was called “the face of printable firearms” by MAKE magazine, one of the most polarizing figures in technology by Forbes, and was named one of the 15 most dangerous people in the world by Wired.”

*And the Department of Justice says there’s nothing illegal about it, either

” Wilson’s nonprofit organization, Defense Distributed, released a video this week showing a gun firing off over 600 rounds—illustrating what is likely to be the first wave of semi-automatic and automatic weapons produced by the additive manufacturing process.

The lower, or “lower receiver” part of a firearm, is the crucial part that contains all of the gun’s operating parts, including the trigger group and the magazine port. (Under American law, the lower is what’s defined as the firearm itself.) The AR is designed to be modular, meaning it can receive different types of “uppers” (barrels) as well as different-sized magazines.

“This is the first publicly printed AR lower demonstrated to withstand a large volume of .223 without structural degradation or failure,” Wilson wrote on Wednesday. “The actual count was 660+ on day 1 with the SLA lower. The test ended when we ran out of ammunition, but this lower could easily withstand 1,000 rounds.”

Already, he says, over 10,000 people have downloaded the lower CAD file, and more have downloaded it through BitTorrent.”

” So that raises the question: is this legal? For now, it would appear so.

“There are no restrictions on an individual manufacturing a firearm for personal use,” a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) spokesperson told Ars. “However, if the individual is engaged in business as a firearms manufacturer, that person must obtain a manufacturing license.”

Wilson said that he’s applied for a federal firearms license in his own name with the ATF in October, and he expects to hear a response “any day now.” The ATF did not respond to our request for confirmation of Wilson’s claims.

” The popular prohibition movement of the moment has firearms in its … err … sights. Led by (really?) Vice President Joe Biden, a White House task force is apparently considering new gun laws that would restrict those scary-looking rifles known as “assault weapons,” ban high-capacity magazines, track sales (maybe through registration?) and require whatever else the politicians in the group think will win them votes.

“The Wiki Weapon project lead by Cody Wilson of Defense Distributed is the first major attempt to develop plans for a 3D-printable firearm. As he states in his video introduction, the idea isn’t new or original, but despite years of discussion, nobody has actually worked out all the details, at least not publicly.

And the plans will be open-source, like software, compatible with open-source CAD software, free for anyone to use, update, modify and share. The long-term goal is to make a reliable, hopefully reusable firearm using nothing more than a RepRap, an inexpensive 3D printer that is designed to be able to replicate all the parts needed to replicate another RepRap, which is also open-source, free for all.

Unlike other recent 3D-printed firearms, the Wiki Weapon standard eventually calls for no non-3D printed parts. Other people have used 3D printers to manufacture AR-15 lower receivers at home, which legally speaking counts as a firearm, but then use off-the-shelf parts and complete upper receivers to build a functioning rifle. Anyone with any AR experience knows that a lower, without the commercially-produced parts, is just a paperweight with a serial number.

So with that idea in mind, Wilson took the idea public. Here’s his introduction.”